News  #  1465
[ Click on NEWS for back issues ][ OUR BOOKS ][ Previous Issue ]

Dr Kaukab Siddique | Editor-in-Chief Zulqi'dah 24, 1433/October 11, 2012 # 45

A critical look at the claim that Pak Taliban shot the Paki girl. Please scroll. Looks like an inside job.

Hadith transforms our lives.
Men, Women Children are Integral Parts of Masjid Community

by Kaukab Siddique

"Unus bin Malik narrates: Once the Messenger of Allah, pbuh, recited very briefly from the Qur'an in the fajr prayer. He was asked : O messenger of Allah, why such a brief recitation? He replied: I heard a baby crying and I thought that his mother is praying with us and I thought it better to let the mother take care of the child as quickly as possible." [Musnad of Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Section 3, hadith 257.]

"When I start praying, I want to pray for a long time, but then I hear a child crying and I make the prayer brief so that the mother may not worry too much owing to the crying of the child." [Prophet Muhammad, pbuh., Sahih al-Bukhari, kitab al-Adhan and Sahih Muslim, kitabus Salat.]

"The sahaba narrate that once during Zuhr prayers, the messenger of Allah, pbuh, stayed in prostration [sajda] while leading prayers, for so long that we thought something had happened or he had suddenly received revelation [wahy]. . After prayers people asked him why one sajda was so long? Had something happened or revelation had come. He replied that it was nothing but that my grandson sat on my back and I did not want to get up quickly and ruin the fun he was having." [Sunan of Nasa'i: 1/134]

These authentic hadith remind us that our community is meant to be united, well-integrated community. Men, women and children belong together in the masjid, with the rules and discipline of Islam.

The mother is there and the Imam cares for her and for her worries and cares. The little children are there and are treated with love and patience. Very small children don't know what's going on and will play horsy by climbing on your back when you go into prostration [sajda].

The holiest mosque with prayers led by the holiest imam does not neglect basic human needs like the crying of a baby.
Just look at the children of our ummah, globally. How they cry for food, for love, for patience, and we keep praying as if does not concern us. Humanity must be at the center of our vision otherwise our prayers become conventional forms without meaning.
Of course, as children grow, we must teach them about the rules of prayer and respect for the mosque.

The Malalal Yousafzai Shooting Story Reeks of a Pakistani Army Press Release
by Nadrat Siddique on Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 2:23pm ·

Nearly all U.S. corporate media are regurgitating virtually the same set of "facts" on the shooting of Pakistani 14-year old Malalal Yousafzai.
Although the event is not far in the past, there are many disparities in the story, which shed doubt on its authenticity: One corporate media report mentions the gunmen as being masked. Another says they were bearded. It is unclear how facial hair would be evident on a masked individual.
According to an October 10 BBC report, "One report, citing local sources, says a bearded gunman stopped a car full of schoolgirls, and asked for Malala Yousafzai by name, before opening fire. But a police official also told BBC Urdu that unidentified gunmen opened fire on the schoolgirls as they were about to board a van or bus."
Also worth noting is the vice-like embrace in which Paki government officials have embraced this particular girl--or more importantly her story, a story which serves to discredit their opposition. Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf said: "We have to fight the mindset that is involved in this. We have to condemn it... Malala is like my daughter, and yours too. If that mindset prevails, then whose daughter would be safe?" No Paki official offered similar support to the Jamia Hafsa women when their Islamic university was being attacked by Pakistani troops in 2007.
Even more oddly, the chief of the Pakistan army, General Ashfaq Kayani, has taken great personal interest in the girl. According to the October 10 Guardian, the "powerful military chief has put himself at the centre of a national outrage over the attempted murder" of Malalal. He went to the extent of visiting her personally in the hospital. One wonders what army chief has time or wherewithal to do that. In a statement viewed as highly cynical by those aware of the Pakistan army's multifarious human rights abuses, he said "The cowards who attacked Malala and her fellow students, have shown time and again how little regard they have for human life and how low they can fall in their cruel ambition to impose their twisted ideology." (Reuters, October 10)
Over and over, the U.S.-funded Pakistani military has been discredited for their extreme barbarism and complete disregard for human rights and the Geneva Conventions. They are viewed as collaborators with the U.S. and NATO by vast segments of the Pakistani population.
In October 2010, the Pakistan military are said to have shot 250 Taliban prisoners. To shoot a girl such as Malala Yousafzai would not be beyond such a force.
They have also collaborated with the U.S. in the killing of hundreds of civilians. Waziristan native Noor Beharam, who has repeatedly risked his life documenting the deaths of women and children, believes that 670 women have been killed by drone strikes. He has taken photos of more than 100 children, their bodies often unrecognizable as human after the strikes
The Pakistan military showed its prowess in media manipulation and propaganda dissemination in the course of the 2007 Lal Masjid siege, when they banned all media from the besieged area.
This writer would not put it beyond the Pakistan army to have sent one of their own to shoot Malalal themselves. It would be a perfect red herring against the increasingly organized opposition to their human rights abuses and to the U.S. drone strikes in which they are complicit.
Ehsanullah Ehsan, Taliban spokesman, ostensibly claimed responsibility for the attack on behalf of the group. Anyone could call the Pakistani media, claim to be Ehsan, and assume responsibility on behalf of his organization in order to discredit it.
It is also possible that the action is the work of one or two misguided individuals. They may have conducted the action without the advance knowledge of the leadership. The TPP is a very large organization, with broad public support among the people of the frontier, and particularly of Swat, where the Pak army has terrorized the population over an extended period of time. Once the deed was done, they may have unthinkingly accepted their organization's role in it. But was the action sanctioned by the top leadership, and approved in advance of the fact? Where are the interviews with the Taliban leadership to ascertain this fact? The corporate media, in keeping with their role as war time propagandists have conducted no such interviews.
Imagine if a shooting was conducted by a Jewish or White Supremacist gunman. It is extremely unlikely that any and the organizations affiliated with him would be immediately condemned. In this case, however, that is exactly what has happened. And the TPP, which seems notoriously lacking in its communication with the media, have allowed an entire segment of the opposition to be linked with a single heinous act, and therefore discredited.
Interestingly, only the VOA report of October 10 does not credit the Taliban with the girl's shooting. The VOA is highly regarded as the overt U.S. government propaganda organ by independent news analysists and thinkers.
The contradictions in detail of the attackers; the fact that Hillary Clinton and the U.S. Department of State; the President of Pakistan; the Prime Minister of Pakistan; and the Pakistan Army Chief all went out of their way to condemn the attack when they have yet to do so in a single one of the killings of women and children by U.S. drones or by their Pak army lackeys; and the absence of any detailed interview with the Taliban are all very suspect to an analytical mind. Regardless of who accepted responsibility afterwards, might the shooting be a Pakistan army/intelligence action? I would not be at all surprised if the "details" picked up by all the major media organs stemmed from a Pakistan army press release. The specter of a young girl being murdered by a force endemic to a country and fighting a foreign occupier is perfect wartime propaganda to deflect the war crimes of the occupier.

Perspective: Muslims don't understand International Media
14-Year old Pakistani Girl's Tragedy: Used by Superpowers to defeat Taliban & by-pass anti-Blasphemy Movement. & Drone Attacks [Three strikes!]
by Kaukab Siddique

Hardly had the news made it out of Pakistan that Malala Yousufzai had been shot, it was on the front page of the New York Times online edition. Then New York Times veteran Islam hater Nicholas Kristoff picked it up. {Oct. 10].

Secular Pakistanis are so impressed by the NY Times, that they never paused to think: Isn't the NY Times the flagship of left wing Zionism? Has it EVER in the last 20 years published anything favorable to Islamic resistance on its front page? The answer is: NEVER!

Here are the facts about Malala:
  1. She has been writing a blog for the BBC against the Taliban for the last three years.

  2. She has worked hand-in-glove with western agencies such as UNICEF which are being used by Paki military to westernize Swat and other Islamic territories.

  3. She was so effective in anti-Taliban propaganda that Obama's hard core Zionist representative Holbrooke paid her a personal visit before his sudden death.

  4. The Pakistani government, which has committed genocide in Frontier areas, gave her national level awards.

Urgent: Petition for Imam Jamil al-Amin
from Bill Johnson

I wanted to draw your attention to this important petition that I recently signed:

"Move Imam Jamil Al-Amin/H. Rap Brown Back to Georgia"

I really think this is an important cause, and I'd like to encourage you to add your signature, too. It's free and takes just a few seconds of your time.

An American Muslim Addresses the Suffering and Poverty of the Masses of People

The US elections and the unemployed
by Jamil Abdur Rahman
National Muslim Council for Justice ( NMCJ )

8 October 2012
The controversy that has broken out over the US Labor Department's report Friday on jobs and unemployment only testifies to the unbridgeable gulf between the corporate ruling elite, including both the Democratic and Republican parties, and the working people who comprise the vast majority of the population.
The official figures showed a net gain of 114,000 jobs during the month of September, a number that closely tracked previous estimates, combined with a greater than expected drop in the unemployment rate, from 8.1 percent to 7.8 percent. More than 40 percent of the unemployed, nearly five million workers, have been jobless for more than six months.
The Obama administration and the Democratic Party immediately hailed the decline in the unemployment rate, which fell below 8 percent for the first time since Obama entered the White House. They viewed the report as a welcome change of subject from the president's dismal performance in Wednesday night's presidential debate.
Republican Party and right-wing media pundits denounced the report, particularly the unemployment rate, as the product of a conspiracy by pro-Obama government officials to provide a favorable jobless figure one month before the November 6 presidential election.
There is a seeming contradiction between the extremely modest job gains reported by the survey of employers—only 114,000 net new jobs—and the survey of households that found an increase of more than 800,000. However, the two figures are generated by separat e surveys, with the household survey itself notoriously volatile, and they frequently show conflicting results.
Moreover, the household survey found the bulk of the increase, nearly 600,000 jobs, came in part-time employment, and much of this seems related to a change in the seasonal pattern of college students reducing work hours when they go back to school. August showed an unexpectedly large decline in employment among those aged 20 to 24, 530,000 compared to an historical average of 98,000. September's large increase may simply reflect a reversal to that abnormal decline.
What is most remarkable about the controversy is how low the bar has been set to mark economic "progress." Democrats rejoice and Republicans cry foul over an unemployment report that would in any other presidential year have been regarded as catastrophic. No president since Franklin Roosevelt in the Great Depression has been reelected with an unemployment rate as high as 7.3 percent.
The two big business parties view the unemployment figures purely from the standpoint of gaining an edge in the mutual mudslinging of the final month of a presidential election campaign. Neither party has the slightest concern for the actual conditions of life of the 12.1 million officially out of work, the 23 million who are either unemployed or working only part-time when they need full-time jobs, or the tens of millions more living in poverty and increasing desperation.
Obama and the Democrats have proposed nothing to put the unemployed back to work, let alone create jobs that pay anything above poverty-level wages. The "stimulus" package adopted in 2009, when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, was deliberately crafted to attract Republican support, focusing on tax cuts for business and excluding any direct job creation by the federal government.
From the time Obama entered the White House, his major concern was to bail out the Wall Street banks and the auto companies at the expense of the working class.
The Republicans, who traditionally set the agenda and boundary lines of big business politics, have been even more vehement in opposition to any measures to alleviate poverty, unemployment and social misery, proposing budgets that would virtually wipe out domestic social spending, ending food stamps and Medicaid as entitlements and transferring them to the states with strictly limited funding.
Romney, in a moment of genuine candor, revealed the real attitude of both presidential candidates towards working people when he dismissed the "47 percent" who believe they are entitled to decent hous ing, food and social services. "I can't worry about them," he said. This 47 percent includes all the unemployed whom the Republican candidate pretends to sympathize with in his campaign speeches.
The National Muslim Council for Justice ( NMCJ ) demands an emergency public works program to provide employment for all, rebuilding schools, hospitals, public housing, roads, mass transportation and other social infrastructure. We demand paid job training and employment for all laid-off workers and for the new generation of young people now entering the workforce. We call for the mobilization of the working class in direct struggle against mass layoffs and workplace shutdowns, particularly under conditions where a new downturn in the economy is looming.
The fight for jobs is bound up with a broader struggle to develop a mass political movement of American Muslims and working class based on a Islamic program.
NMCJ is an advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

I am for truth, no matter who tells it. I am for justice, no matter who it is for or against. ( El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz )

2012-10-12 Fri 17:12:35 cdt